English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

We examined the potential for interspecific differences among meiobenthic copepods in their exploitation of microalgal food resources in a natural benthic community. The feeding behaviors of Coullana sp., Cletocamptus deitersi, Microarthridion littorale, and Pseudostenhelia wellsi were examined using I4C-radiotracer grazing experiments and gut-pigment analyses. In one grazing experiment, laboratory-cultured microalgae were labeled using NaH1'C03 and injected into intact sediment cores to determine whether copepods were grazing on algae from the water column and/or at the sediment-water interface. In another grazing experiment, NaHL4C03 was injected directly into sediment cores and grazing on I4C-labeled natural algae was measured. Fluorometric analyses of gutpigments were used to determine the recent feeding histories of copepods. Functional responses of copepod feeding to variation in sedimentary chlorophyll (chl) a concentrations were also used to discern interspecific differences in feeding. Coullana sp. grazed on microalgae from the water-column and at the sediment-water interface. C deitersi grazed predominantly on microalgae from the sediment-water interface Grazing on laboratory-cultured algae was minimal in M. littorale and F! wellsi, but grazing experiments with 'v-labeled natural algae and gut-pigment analyses indicated that these copepods grazed on microalgae in the field. However, a positive functional response to chl a concentrations by M. littorale and a lack of a functional response by P wellsi suggest that these 2 species exploit algal resources difterently. Collectively, our observations indicate that each copepod species examined exploits microalgal resources differently. K E Y WORDS: Meiofauna . Grazing . Microalgae Harpacticoid copepods Cletocaniptus deitersi . Pseudcrstenhelia wellsi . Microarthridlon littorale . Coullana sp.

Interspecific differences among meiobenthic copepods in the use of microalgal food resources